Monday, September 2, 2013

Planned Economies Vs. Free Market Economies

Our societies manage and rely on two different types of economic "strategies": planned and free market economies.  However, most countries around the globe have a combination of these called "mixed economy" which explodes the most efficient characteristics of each individual one, while only three countries maintain a planned economy (North Korea, Cuba, Laus).
It is debatable which of these two main economies is a more logic and effective one to apply on a modern society, having both their unique advantages and disadvantages.

A planned economy is an economic system, used by one third of the world during the 1980’s, in which the government makes all of the main decisions regarding resources, employment and capital income in the “best interest” of the people to maintain a stable economic development and for equality in social aspects. This economy is frequently associated to communism for the way it functions and the amount of participation from the government in general matters. Resources are owned by the state and the government dictates the levels of production as well as the prices and wages of it. This central planning aims to increase the rates of productivity by consolidating economic resources when planning for investment and other actions. However, many argue if it is efficient for one entity to have such power over something as massive as a national economy, and debate about how having a constant, regular payment for people promotes inefficiency and laziness.

On the other hand, we have the free market economies in which the economic problematic is handled by private enterprises and all resources are privately owned. Here, the companies base their actions on the concept of “demand and supply” to organize the levels, prices and wages of production and satisfy the necessary requirements while creating a formidable income from it, creating different status jobs and giving people the opportunity to escalate in a successful career. This is a more individual, independent way for companies and brands to handle their products and profits, having to design strategies adequate for their particular needs and characteristics. There is, as explained, no government intervention in these and they conquer success by adapting to the demand changes in each particular scenario. This is a fairly popular strategy around the world, because it allows for flexibility and diversity of plans for the development of the industry.

The controversial question of “Which is better?” is almost impossible to answer in a general context since every nation needs different, unique needs to satisfy and divergent strategies to satisfy them with. However, if it were imperative for me to decide, I would probably opt for the “mixed economies” system to provide just the necessary push for companies and industries to rise. This economies I believe allow for a very independent development of ideas and actions, but has the government’s involvement as a backup and pillar in case of any complications with the processes or difficulties in handling the possible abrupt changes and fluctuations in national requirements or needs. 

By: Ana Gabriela Gonzalez

1 comment:

  1. Ana, you did a really good job, i like how you structure your paragrapghs and ideas, it makes it clear to understand what you want to say.
    You explain well both planned economies and free market, telling its history, its ideas, the causes and effect in good and bad ways, which makes the reader have more knowledge about the topic.
    About your conclusion I say that it is excelent, you give your own point of view and the goverment point of view.
    Good work :)

    ReplyDelete